Four of the about 20 prison inmates convicted in Ventura County who could qualify for reduced sentences under Proposition 36 will appear in court Thursday.

The proposition, overwhelmingly approved by voters last year, changes the nation’s harshest three-strikes law to allow shorter sentences for some offenders. Some defendants who were sentenced to 25 years to life in prison for nonviolent crimes under the three-strikes law will be allowed to argue in court for shorter sentences.

Under the proposition, the third felony must be a serious or violent crime to trigger an automatic sentence of 25 years to life in prison. Proposition 36 was approved by a 69 percent vote, according to the California Secretary of State’s Office, but courts and attorneys got no guidelines on how to conduct resentencing hearings.

“Part of this process is that it’s an evolving process, and each county has been left on its own devices to figure out the best way to go about this, and every county is doing it differently,” said Ventura County prosecutor Scott Hendrickson. “There is no statutory scheme to how to do it, just a statute telling us that we have to do it.”

About 20 of California’s prison inmates who could qualify for resentencing under Proposition 36 were convicted in Ventura County, according to prosecutors.

“Before they can be resentenced, we are going to have a hearing on whether or not they can be resentenced as a two-strike defendant instead of staying a three-strike defendant,” Hendrickson said.

Four inmates are scheduled to appear in court Thursday. They are Oscar Anthony Barretto, 48, who was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm in 1999; Albert Felix Cruz, 64, who was found guilty of burglary in 1996; Phillip E. Flores, 47, who pleaded guilty to assault with a deadly weapon in 1997; and Christopher Edward Bravot, 49, who has a 1994 burglary conviction.

The judge must determine whether resentencing an offender would pose “an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety,” Hendrickson said.

“That is the issue that we will be working on in these cases,” he said.

Hendrickson said the court will consider the offender’s criminal history, including past two-strike convictions, in determining whether an inmate is an “unreasonable risk” to public safety. An inmate’s behavior in prison will be taken into consideration, Hendrickson said.

“There are many factors involved here,” he said.

Attorney Michael McMahon, with the Ventura County Public Defender’s Office, said the only way the court can oppose resentencing is upon a “factual finding” that the reduced sentence will pose a threat to the community.

His office will urge the judge to release offenders who aren’t found to pose a risk to the community.

“There are dozens if not hundreds of inmates up and down the state who have already gone through court and been resentenced,” McMahon said. “Others are finishing their sentences under the resentencing.”

McMahon said evidence can be presented on family and other support that inmates will receive in the community.

Crimes including grand theft, second-degree or commercial burglary and possession of drugs aren’t considered strike offenses, Hendrickson said. Rape, robbery, residential burglaries and aggravated assault are examples of crimes that are considered strikes, according to prosecutors.

A drunken-driving accident that caused great bodily injuries could be considered a third-strike felony under the new law, Hendrickson said. However, simply causing an injury while driving drunk isn’t a third strike under Proposition 36, he said.

He said the district attorney is working closely with the courts and the Public Defender’s Office, which is handling the bulk of these cases, to figure out how to make the process work.

“We might disagree ultimately on what should happen on a case but we are working together on a way to make the process work,” Hendrickson said.